Re: [boost] Re: FC++: formal review

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-01 17:47:40

David Abrahams wrote:
> Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Sure, you have to have a way to put primitives together into programs.
> 
> 
>>When reviewing a language (yes, FC++ *is* a language, or more
>>particularly, an EDSL--embedded domain specific language; sure
>>Spirit is also an EDSL), I analyze it based on the three points I
>>listed above.
> 
> 
> The problem, as I see it, is that we already have a DSEL (sorry, I've
> never seen the "Embedded" placed first) for functional programming in
> Boost.Lambda that's terser, arguably easier to read, and whose idioms
> fit more closely with other Boost FP systems (bind, mpl), and existing
> C++ programming paradigms.

Darn! I always get confused by those acronyms! No wonder I chose
"Spirit" instead of an acronym. I always forget them :-o

I have to agree though. I prefer the LL-style operator overloading.
As I've already pointed out, it's easy to alleviate the problem
of immediate evaluation such as:

     for_each(f, l, cout << "hello, " << _1);

by simply prohibiting automatic LHS and RHS conversion such as the
above (flag it as a compile error). Instead, ask the user to always
use explicit var(x) and val(x) when dealing with lambda expressions:

     for_each(f, l, var(cout) << val("hello, ") << _1);

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net